If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Granger for Thomas Robinson (West 2.0)

I say we make this happen. We need a young PF to groom to be the future. Obviously we'd want picks or something else to make it a better fit financially, etc. But If the Kings new management decides to hold onto Cousins, I think we could swing for Robinson. His game is very similar to West but more athletic.

The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Doddage For This Useful Post:

Re: Granger for Thomas Robinson (West 2.0)

I'm not sure I'd do it. I love the idea of adding a good young prospect to eventually takeover for West, but Robinson has looked pretty awful thus far, although he's been better as of late. He strikes me as a career Jordan Hill/Chris Wilcox-level player.

Re: Granger for Thomas Robinson (West 2.0)

The only rookies I don't scoff at the idea of trading Granger for is Lillard and Davis. Those are the only two that I believe will have a better individual career than Granger. That and I'm ready to contend now, not 2 more years from now.

The Following User Says Thank You to pezhan For This Useful Post:

Re: Granger for Thomas Robinson (West 2.0)

Why can't we wait and see what Granger adds to the team before shipping him off for a rookie? Can Granger help us go deep into the playoffs better than a rookie that wouldn't even start on our team? Absolutely he can and will.

"I've got an idea--an idea so smart that my head would explode if I even began to know what I'm talking about." - Peter Griffin

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to DGPR For This Useful Post:

Re: Granger for Thomas Robinson (West 2.0)

I agree that this should be in the fake trades forum. But I honestly don't have any interest in trading Granger right now. Maybe in the offseason just because of the inability to pay all these guys, but before then--nope. Not unless it's a major coup for the Pacers.